State (Roman Empire) – State religion (worship of the
emperor and tolerance of local practice).

The small Christian communion was sometimes tolerated and
sometimes persecuted

Pliny, Letters 10.96-97,

Pliny
to the Emperor Trajan

It is my practice, my lord, to refer to you all matters concerning
which I am in doubt. For who can better give guidance to my hesitation or
inform my ignorance? I have never participated in trials of Christians. I
therefore do not know what offenses it is the practice to punish or
investigate, and to what extent. And I have been not a little hesitant as to
whether there should be any distinction on account of age or no difference
between the very young and the more mature; whether pardon is to be granted for
repentance, or, if a man has once been a Christian, it does him no good to have
ceased to be one; whether the name itself, even without offenses, or only the
offenses associated with the name are to be punished.

…

Soon accusations spread, as usually happens, because of the proceedings
going on, and several incidents occurred. An anonymous document was published
containing the names of many persons. Those who denied that they were or had
been Christians, when they invoked the gods in words dictated by me, offered
prayer with incense and wine to your image, which I had ordered to be brought
for this purpose together with statues of the gods, and moreover cursed
Christ--none of which those who are really Christians, it is said, can be
forced to do--these I thought should be discharged. Others named by the informer
declared that they were Christians, but then denied it, asserting that they had
been but had ceased to be, some three years before, others many years, some as
much as twenty-five years. They all worshipped your image and the statues of
the gods, and cursed Christ.

..

I therefore postponed the investigation and hastened to consult you.
For the matter seemed to me to warrant consulting you, especially because of
the number involved. For many persons of every age, every rank, and also of
both sexes are and will be endangered. For the contagion of this superstition
has spread not only to the cities but also to the villages and farms. But it
seems possible to check and cure it. It is certainly quite clear that the
temples, which had been almost deserted, have begun to be frequented, that the
established religious rites, long neglected, are being resumed, and that from
everywhere sacrificial animals are coming, for which until now very few
purchasers could be found. Hence it is easy to imagine what a multitude of
people can be reformed if an opportunity for repentance is afforded.

Trajan
to Pliny

You observed proper procedure, my dear Pliny, in sifting the cases of
those who had been denounced to you as Christians. For it is not possible to
lay down any general rule to serve as a kind of fixed standard. They are not to
be sought out; if they are denounced and proved guilty, they are to be
punished, with this reservation, that whoever denies that he is a Christian and
really proves it--that is, by worshiping our gods--even though he was under
suspicion in the past, shall obtain pardon through repentance. But anonymously
posted accusations ought to have no place in any prosecution. For this is both
a dangerous kind of precedent and out of keeping with the spirit of our age.

THE ESTABLISHED
CHURCH

Constantine
(312 Battle of Milvian Bridge)

Old Testament theocracy, King - Priests (prophets), seen as model for relationship between the Emperor - Bishops.

Conflicts between Church and State

1.Morality. Bishop Ambrose and Theodosius. Following massacre of Thessalonica
(390AD). 7000 people killed. Ambrose refused to celebrate communion in
Emperor’s presence, until Theodosius repented and agreed to introduce a law
which required a 30 day delay from the passing of a death sentence to its
execution.

2.Doctrine and worship. The emperors presided
over the councils of the Bishops

-Arian controversy

-Iconoclasm

If someone was guilty of ‘heresy’, it meant that they
were guilty of treason.

So, for instance, Maximus refused to recant of his
teaching that Christ had both a divine will and a human will. He was initially
exiled, and then had his right hand and his tongue cut out.

3.Appointments. Papal conflicts with
rulers about who has the right to appoint Bishops and Abbots.

1353 The Statute of Praemunire prohibited the assertion
or maintenance of papal jurisdiction, imperial or foreign, or some other alien
jurisdiction or claim of supremacy in England, against the supremacy of the
monarch.

Henry VIII,
Cranmer and all that

Henry wanted a divorce. The pope could not give him one. So
Henry, encouraged by Cranmer – who saw in this situation an opportunity for the
Reformation to gain a foothold in England - adopted an Erastian position: that
the ruler of the nation has the right to choose the religion of the nation.

Erastianism is named after
C16th Swiss philosopher and Zwinglian theologian, Thomas Erastus – although
Erastus only argued that the state had both the right and the duty to punish
all offences, ecclesiastical as well as civil, wherever all citizens adhered to a single religion.

Erastianism says that the needs of the church and of the
state had become fused within the

overarching concept of the Christian Commonwealth. A view
held by most reformers.

-Developed notion of the godly prince, divinely
appointed and who had to be obeyed.

-Rediscovery of Patristics and Constantine

The needs of both Church and State could be provided by
the Prince alone:

Cranmer writes, “All Christian princes have committed
unto them immediately of God the whole cure of all their subjects, as well
concerning the administration of God’s word for the cure of souls, as concerning
the ministration of things political and civil governance.”

But he writes to Mary: “But I fear me that there be
contradictions in your oaths [to the Pope and to the Crown] and that those
which should have informed your grace thoroughly, did not their duties therein.
And if your majesty ponder the two oaths diligently, I think you shall perceive
you were deceived; and then your highness may use the matter as God shall put in
your heart”.

Cranmer’s dream of two kings contending with each other
for his soul. One was Henry and the other was Jesus

·To be accused of heresy was to be accused of
treason

·Baptism was not only admission into the church,
but admission into citizenship.

Bishops

1.Appointments. Henry took to himself the
right to appoint Bishops.

The Ecclesiastical
Appointments Act 1534 (still stands today).

Before the Act, the dean and chapter of a cathedral held
an election for a new bishop and customarily chose the candidate supported by
the King. The Act bound the cathedral chapter to elect the candidate whom the
King selected in his "letter missive". If the dean and chapter
declined to make the election accordingly, or if the bishops of the church
refused to consecrate the King's candidate, then they would be punished. The
Act therefore established royal domination of the election of bishops as an enforceable
legal right with a heavy penalty.

“Your Grace, I exhibit my
proxy for the College of Canons and make myself a party for them. I present to
you the Letters Patent of Our Sovereign Lady The Queen issued under the Great
Seal of the Realm requiring the Confirmation of the Election of the Right
Reverend Justin Portal Welby, Bishop of Durham to be Archbishop and Pastor of
the Cathedral and Metropolitical Church of Christ Canterbury.”

The Act still stands today, although penalties for
chapters who went against the will of the crown were only abolished in 1967.

2.Allegiance
of Bishops and clergy to the crown

I, A B, do swear that I
will be faithful and bear true allegiance to Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II,
her heirs and successors, according to law: So help me God.

When James II was run off the throne, 7 bishops were
unable to swear an oath of allegiance to William and Mary (because they had
declared their oath of allegiance to Charles). Called Non-Jurors

Argued for scripture (absolute authority when it spoke
plainly and unequivocally), Church tradition and Reason (when scripture and
tradition were not clear).

The core of his thinking on church and state was his
emphasis on unity. He argued that the Puritans adopted an impossible position
when they claimed to be loyal to the Queen while repudiating her church. By law
and reason the people of England must be Anglican, pledged to serve Elizabeth
as supreme magistrate of country and supreme governor of the church.

Church government

Convocations of Canterbury and York go back to 733.
Synods composed entirely of bishops, but in C13th more clergy were cited. Their
purpose was to approve canonical legilstaling and discuss amount of tax to be
paid to the crown because the clergy were taxed independently of Parliament.

1534: convocations subject to control of crown.

1603/4 they approved consolidation of laws into the Canon
law of the CoE

1661 – approved text of BCP before it was submitted to
parliament

1665 – agreed to surrender right of clergy to tax
themselves

After 1717, meetings limited to formal sessions required
at beginning of a new parliament.

Effectively Parliament became the legislative body for
the CoE

THE DE FACTO MOVE
TOWARD A DE FACTO DISESTABLISHMENT

1. Synodical
government

If the state = the church, then every person in the
parish is a member of the church. So everyone can choose the churchwarden.
‘Vestry’ meeting.

1894: establishment of parish councils which took over
the secular responsibilities of the vestry meeting.

In 1919, the enabling act, gave the CoE a new national
assembly and a new pattern of self-government.

Question of who would represent the church at lay level?
Need for electoral roll from whom and by whom requisite elections could be
made.

Two views

a)Henson
(Bp of Durham 1920-39). Opposed any move to distance CoE from State. He
resisted idea of electoral rolls and two tiers of members. ‘The voluntarily
enrolled would have pretensions to be the Church and would therefore ‘unchurch’
the merely passive parishioners.’

b)Gore
(Bp of Oxford). Anglo-Catholic background. Alarmed by minimal inclusion
requirements to go on electoral roll (baptism). Wanted to ensure that the roll
only included people who had been confirmed and were communicants.

2. Conflict with
Parliament over the Prayer Book.

1926-27 The new synod introduced a revised version of the
BCP. Rejected by Parliament (twice), because it was perceived to be too
‘catholic’.

The 1928 Prayer book was never fully authorised, but
bishops could give ‘dispensation’ for those parishes which wished to use it.

Worship and Doctrine measure (1974). Parliament gives up
its right to legislate on matters of worship and doctrine – allowing synod to
introduce new forms of worship.

Parliament gives away right to divide up dioceses (1978)

3. The appointment
of Bishops

Gordon Brown (2007) stated that he would only receive one
name nominated by the Crown Nominations Commission for bishops (up to this
point the PM could choose between two names)

WHY THERE SHOULD BE DISESTABLISHMENT

Colin Buchanan in his Cut
the Connection (1994) argues for disestablishment.

1.There
is no justification for establishment. Decline in numbers of people who would
profess to be members of the CoE. Fewer come to the church for occasional
offices (less than 30% of funerals are conducted by CoE churches or ministers. 2016:
number of people attending Sunday services is 752460.

2.Return
to NT church: ‘An international society which sits within Roman Empire, ready
to normally obey laws, pay taxes and honour authorities. But for the life of
its ecclesial society it makes its choices, sends out missionaries, arranges
priorities, appoints ministers and views itself as accountable to God’. It is
not ‘owned or directed by the state’.

3.Establishment
leads to a confused theology of baptism and membership. Who is a member?

The
establishment model says that everyone is a member, unless they choose to opt
out. But many would reject the idea that they are ‘Christians’ unless they have
opted out.

Many
still see baptism as an entry point to becoming a good citizen, which also
includes admission into the church. People do not perceive a need for faith, or
for regular worship.

4.State
interference in Church affairs. Some legislation passed by Synod needs ratification
by parliament

5.It
hinders mission – if everyone is a member of the church, to whom is the mission
directed?

6.It
hinders ecumenism – because of the CoE’s favoured status.

7.Power
corrupts the Church

8.It
puts a future monarch in a potentially impossible situation – as head of a
church of a faith in which he or she does not believe. The 1688 Act of
Settlement requires the monarch to be a Protestant, although the 2013
Succession to the Crown Act permits the monarch to marry a Roman Catholic.

The monarch swears, ‘to
maintain and preserve inviolably the settlement of the Church of England, and
the doctrine, worship, discipline and government thereof, as by law established
in England’

WHY THERE SHOULD NOT BE DISESTABLISHMENT

1.The
Church does not now need disestablishment. It effectively has full autonomy. De
facto if not de jure the state has ‘cut the connection’. The state can
interfere in the life of the CoE (eg women bishops, gay marriage, prevent
strategy), but only in the same way that it might interfere with any voluntary
group.

2.Bishops
in the House of Lords. ​Lord Hennessy described the Archbishop's speech to the
House of Lord's following BREXIT as one of the best speeches that he has ever
heard in the Lord's.

3.It
can be an instrument of patriotism and a licensed critic of government policy

4.We
punch above our weight, and can bring people together.

5.Involvement
of Church in education

6.Many
other faith groups and churches welcome an established church, because it gives
them a voice they would not have if they were treated like any other voluntary
body. Tariq Madood, ‘the minimal nature of an Anglican establishment, its
proven openness to other denominations and faiths seeking public space, and the
fact that its very existence is an ongoing acknowledgement of the public
character of religion, are all reasons why it may seem far less intimidating to
the minority faiths than a triumphal secularism’. It is a position that can be
used for the benefit of all

7.Maintains
a link between a (currently) popular monarchy and church

8.It
enhances mission. There are still many who have no faith who see the Church of
England as their church – and therefore it offers tremendous opportunities for
evangelism. There are places where civic/mayoral services still offer benefits
for the proclamation of the gospel.

9.Legally
it would be very difficult to do (think how hard it has been to reform the
Lords)

10.The
nation needs to be reminded that the origins of much of our legal system is
Christianity.

ESTABLISHMENT, AS
IT EXISTS NOW, IS GOOD FOR OUR NATION

Disestablishment would be the nation formally repudiating
its Christian heritage.

Frank Field: ‘It keeps the rumour, that mystery of God
alive’

Michael Allison: ‘The state in all Western societies now
is becoming increasingly secularized, increasingly the victim of pressure
groups of every sort from every side. I think the state needs the support and interaction
with the church more than ever before in our history’.

The danger of
establishment for the Church

1.Power
can corrupt the Church

2.The
Church may be compelled to buy into the State’s overriding agenda for unity and
inclusiveness – to the extent that we could be forced to abandon ‘exclusivist’ doctrines
about the uniqueness of Christ.

The Church is not financially dependent on the State (in contrast to many established churches in Europe)

CONCLUSION: WHEN WILL THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND BE DISESTABLISHED?

If de jure disestablishment does come, it will probably
be before a coronation. But I suspect the legal and constitutional issues
will be too complicated, and I wonder whether there will ever be a legal divorce.
The state wants to be free of the church so that it can have multiple partners;
but because divorce is too costly, it will settle for separation. The church
wants a good relationship with the state because it still loves the state,
feels it can help keep the state from foolish over-indulgence, and for the sake
of the children.

Comments

Post a comment

Popular posts from this blog

An Advent carol service Leader The people who walked in darkness have seen a great light;Choir Those who lived in a land of deep darkness on them light has shoneChoir O nata lux de lumine – Tallis (O light, born of light)

Leader In this service, we join with brothers and sisters around the world, and light candles to mark the signs that God has given to his people as we journey through Advent. FIRST CANDLE: Abraham and Sarah, to whom the promise was first given. We light our first candle to recall the men and women of faith in the Old Testament, to whom the promise would be given. 4000 years before the birth of Christ, God told Abraham and Sarah that one of their descendants would destroy sin and death, rule the world and bless all nations.

(A person lights the First Candle)

Leader Let us prayAll God of Abraham and Sarah and all the Patriarchs of old, we thank you for the promise that you have given us. Help us, like A…

Acts 2:37-47 Peter, in Acts 2:40, urges the people who listen to him: ‘Save yourselves from this corrupt generation’ How could he say that? How can you call any generation corrupt? It is very simple. Peter is speaking to a generation which has crucified the Son of God. Some people here may be landlords. I don’t know whether you ever have any problems getting rent. If you do, God knows what it is like! Jesus tells a story about a vineyard. The owner gave it to some people. He said to them, ‘Look after it for me. Care for it, enjoy it. All I ask is that you remember that it belongs to me, that it is my gift to you, and give me what is mine when I send my messengers to you for the rent. The owner goes away. Some time later he sends a messenger. The tenants beat up the messenger and send him away with nothing. The owner sends another messenger. The tenants do the same thing to him. Finally the owner says, ‘I will send my own son. He will come with my full authority. They will respect him’. Bu…

Children are a gift from God. And as always with God’s gifts to us, they are completely and totally undeserved. And you have been given the astonishing gift of Benjamin, and the immense privilege and joy of loving him for God, and of bringing him up for God. And of course our greatest desire for our children is to see them grow, be happy, be secure, flourish and to be fulfilled, to bring blessing to others, to be part of the family of God and to love God. And in baptism you are placing Benjamin full square in the family of God. I know that those of us here differ in our views about infant baptism. The belief and the practice of the Church of England is in line with that of the historic church, but also – at the time of the Reformation – of Calvin and the other so-called ‘magisterial reformers’ (which is also the stance taken in the Westminster confession). They affirmed, on the basis of their covenantal theology (which sees baptism as a new covenant version of circumcision), of Mark 10:1…